By Prasun Chaturvedi
Context:
This article is a critical review of the above captioned paper. The Institute of
Development Studies at Sussex conducted a research on the relationship between
civil society and good governance in India between 1998-2000. The study
examines how civil society interventions influence and promote responsive
governance in an established democracy facing significant challenges in meeting
basic needs. The authors focus on civil society initiatives that address the
concerns of marginalized and underprivileged groups.
Key Aspects
of the Research:
1.
Introduction
The
research explores the relationship between civil society and good governance in
India. It focuses on civil society initiatives concerning underprivileged and
marginalized groups. The study examines how civil society interventions impact
and promote responsive governance. I have summarized here the key takeaways
from the book, The first chapter introduces terms that are used throughout the
book, hence we have attempted to define them here.
A. Definitions:
The research has been
structured around certain conceptual frameworks that have helped structure in
understanding the complex interactions between civil society and governance in
India. The authors primarily introduce the terms "civil society" and
"governance" in the Introductions section. However, there are no
other formal definitions provided, but I have distilled them here from the
text, appreciating the lens and words through which the authors have analyzed
the case studies and arrived at the conclusions. According to the
interpretations of the research, the we may define the key terms as under:-
1. Civil Society: Civil
society is defined as the realm of organized social life that is voluntary,
self-generating, (largely) self-supporting, autonomous from the state, and
bound by a legal order or set of shared rules. It involves citizens acting
collectively in a public sphere to express their interests, passions, and
ideas, exchange information, achieve mutual goals, make demands on the state,
and hold state officials accountable.
Key elements of civil society include:
1.
Voluntary associations
2.
Autonomy from the state
3.
Self-organization
4.
Collective action in the public sphere
Civil society is distinct from
both the state and the market, occupying a space between these two sectors and
includes a wide range of organizations, from informal neighborhood groups to
more formalized non-governmental organizations (NGOs).
2.
Governance:
The research relies heavily on the World Bank's concept of "good
governance." According to this framework: Governance refers to the exercise of political, economic and
administrative authority in the management of a country's affairs at all
levels. It comprises the complex mechanisms, processes and institutions through
which citizens and groups articulate their interests, mediate their differences
and exercise their legal rights and obligations.
Key aspects of governance highlighted in
the research include:
1.
Public policy formulation and implementation
2.
Accountability of state institutions
3.
Local self-governance
The authors emphasize that good governance is characterized
by:
➔ Transparency
➔ Accountability
➔ Efficiency
➔ Rule
of law
➔ Participation
While these definitions form
the conceptual basis of the research, they are primarily derived from Western
and World Bank perspectives. This reliance on Western-centric definitions is
one of the critiques I have raised against the study, as it may not fully
capture the unique aspects of civil society and governance in the Indian
context.
3. Public Sphere: The concept of the
public sphere is closely related to civil society in this research. Drawing
from Habermas's work, the public sphere is described as: “A discursive space in which individuals and groups congregate to
discuss matters of mutual interest and, where possible, to reach a common
judgment.” This concept is crucial in understanding how civil society
operates and influences governance.
4.
Associational
Life: The research uses associational life as a key principle for
categorizing civil society initiatives. It refers to : “The voluntary coming together of people for collective action, mutual
support, or to pursue common interests.” This framework helps in mapping
the structure of civil society in India.
5. Marginalization: Given the research's
focus on underprivileged groups, the concept of marginalization is central.
While not explicitly defined, it is used to refer to: “Groups that are systematically excluded from full participation in
social, economic, and political life due to factors such as caste, class,
gender, ethnicity, or geographic location.”
6. Good Governance: Building on the World
Bank's concept, the research elaborates on good governance as: “A form of governance that is democratic,
effective, equitable, transparent, and accountable, promoting the rule of law
and protecting human rights.”
7. Civil Society Intervention: This is a
key operational concept in the research, referring to: “Actions taken by civil society organizations or groups to influence
public policy, hold the state accountable, or improve local governance.”
8. Local Self-Governance: With reference
to the Indian context, particularly the Panchayati Raj system, local
self-governance is conceptualized as: “A
system of governance where local communities have substantial control over
local affairs, including resource allocation and development planning.”
9. Collective Action: This concept is
crucial in understanding how civil society operates. It's described as: “Coordinated efforts by groups of individuals
to achieve common objectives, often in the face of opposition or to address
shared grievances.”
10.
Social
Movements: While not extensively theorized, social movements are mentioned
as a form of civil society action, understood as: “Organized efforts to promote or resist social change, often operating
outside formal institutional channels.”
11. Empowerment:This concept is used in
relation to marginalized groups and is understood as: “The process of increasing the capacity of individuals or groups to make
choices and to transform those choices into desired actions and outcomes.”
Research
Objectives:
The broad objective of the research is to explore the impact
of civil society interventions on the promotion of good governance in India. Specific objectives include:
1.
Examining the contexts and backgrounds that
create conditions for civil society intervention
2.
Analyzing the nature of civil society
interventions
3.
Investigating the processes of civil society
intervention, including:
- Forms of intervention
- Resources mobilized
- Strategies used
- Leadership within civil society
- Alliances formed with state, political parties, private sector, and other civil society players
4. Identifying
factors that facilitate or negate the impact of civil society on governance
Research
Questions:
While not explicitly mentioned in the research, We can infer
the following research questions based on the objectives :
1.
How do civil society interventions impact
governance in India, particularly in relation to marginalized groups?
2.
What are the key factors that enable or hinder
effective civil society intervention in governance?
3.
How do civil society organizations mobilize
resources and form alliances to influence governance?
4. What
are the processes through which civil society interventions translate into
governance outcomes?
Research
Methodology:
The research methodology broadly includes the following
components:
1.
Historical overview of civil society and
governance in India
2.
Mapping of civil society structures in India
3.
Selection of specific types of civil society
players
4.
Identification of a set of civil society
initiatives
5.
Consultation with "best thinkers and
practitioners of civil society discourse in India"
6.
Selection of 16 case studies for in-depth
analysis
7.
Focus on initiatives addressing issues from the
perspective of poor and marginalized groups
8. Analysis
of cases in three main areas: public policy, accountability, and local
governance
2.
Historical Overview
The following key points can be summarized from this
section:-
- Traces
the evolution of civil society in India from colonial times to
post-independence. - Highlights key movements and associations that shaped
civil society in India.
As the section states:
"The changes which swept through the communist regimes in the Eastern
Central Europe and military dictatorships in the countries of Latin America
ushering in capitalist economy and establishing democratic regimes not only
affected the political and economic landscape in these countries; along with
that they also proved the collective power of ordinary people in defining and
achieving what they considered as essential for good life."
The research provides a
historical overview of civil society in India, tracing its evolution from the
colonial period to post-independence. Key points include:
1. Colonial Period:
- The
emergence of voluntary associations and social reform movements in the 19th
century
- The
role of these associations in challenging colonial rule and social inequities -
The growth of nationalist movements and their impact on civil society formation
2. Post-Independence Era:
- The
development of a democratic framework that provided space for civil society
engagement
- The
changing relationship between the state and civil society organizations
- The
emergence of new forms of collective action and social movements
3. Late 20th Century Developments[1]:
- The
impact of economic liberalization on civil society dynamics
- The
rise of identity-based movements and their influence on governance
- The
growing role of NGOs and their interaction with the state and international
actors
3. Broad
Mapping of CSOs
The key aspects addressed in
this sections are as follows:- Maps the landscape of civil society
organizations in India.
- Categorizes civil society
initiatives based on associational life.
The
research provides an extensive mapping of civil society organizations (CSOs) in
India, detailing their roles, classifications, and interactions with governance
structures, each contributing uniquely to governance and development :
1. Classification System: The authors use
"association" as the basis for classifying civil society, focusing on
how citizens associate to pursue common purposes. Association here is referring to how humans band together to pursue
common purposes they cannot achieve individually. They should be Voluntary, for
the public good, and often involve paying dues.
2. Five Types of Associations:
a)
Traditional
Associations: Based on tribe, ethnicity, or caste. Many have declined due
to
state expansion and modernization.
b)
Religious
Associations: Inspired by various religions and sects, focusing on charity,
education, healthcare, and social welfare.
c)
Social
Movements: Including movements focused on marginalized groups (tribals,
dalits,
women), protests against specific practices or policies,
environmental movements, and governance/accountability campaigns.
d)
Membership
Associations: Modern organizations where individuals formally join.
Subtypes include:
- Representational
(e.g., trade unions, peasant organizations)
- Professional
(e.g., associations for lawyers, doctors)
- Social-cultural
(e.g., sports clubs, cultural groups)
- Self-help
(e.g., community-based organizations)
e) Intermediary Organizations: These serve as a bridge between
citizens and state
institutions. Subtypes :-
○ Service
delivery (e.g., schools, hospitals)
○ Mobilizational (empowering local
communities)
○ Support (providing resources to other
organizations)
○ Philanthropic
(funding other civil society organizations)
○ Advocacy
(focusing on specific causes)
○ Network
(associations of other intermediaries)
3.
Complexity
and Overlap: The authors acknowledge that this classification isn't rigid,
and many organizations may fit into multiple categories or perform various
functions.
4.
Scope: The
map covers a wide range of "public good" initiatives, from serving
particular community interests to addressing issues of marginalized groups and
elites.
5.
Limitations:
As admitted in the paper itself, the classification doesn't include
individual initiatives, transient groups, or hybrid types. It also doesn't
assess the degree of autonomy, effectiveness, or voluntarism in these
associations.
The paper argues that CSOs occupy a unique space between the
state and the market, serving as a bridge between government institutions and
citizens. The relationship between CSOs and the state is complex, characterized
by cooperation, conflict, and negotiation, example.
a)
Cooperation:
Collaboration to implement development programs, providing expertise,
resources, and grassroots networks to the government, especially in areas such
as health, education, and social welfare.
b)
Conflict:
May arise when advocating for human rights, environmental protection, or
social justice that often challenge state policies and practices that are
perceived as unjust or discriminatory.
c) Negotiation: With both the state and
market actors to influence policy decisions, secure funding, and build
partnerships, involving navigating complex power dynamics and balancing
competing interests.[2]
4. Case
Studies Analysis
- Examines
15 cases of civil society interventions in areas like public policy,
accountability, and local governance.
- This
analysis of cases is divided into three sections, based on the issues it
addresses:-
1. Public
policy. - 8 cases
2. Accountability
in governance - 4 cases.
Cases - Campaign again rape of women, Dalit assertion in
UP, Campaign for clean air (Delhi), Alternative budget analysis
3. Local
self-governance in rural and urban areas. - 3 cases
Cases - Protest againt acquisition of grazing land
(Gujarat),Tribal’s struggle for Nistar rights (Maharashtra), Devolution in
urban governance (Bangalore)
In public policy from the vantage
point of the marginalised people, focus is on three aspects:
1. inclusion of interests, concerns in policy
Cases - Housing rights for pavement dwellers (Mumbai), CMM
(MP)
2. proper implementation of existing policies,
Cases - Distribution of land patta to Kol tribals (UP),
Textile workers health and safety (Ahmedabad), Universal primary education
(Mumbai)
3. reform of oppressive policies.
Cases- Fisherman’s struggle agaisnt merchandised fishing
(Kerala), People’s movement against ISFP (Chilika), Displacement related to
Subarnekha dam (Bihar)
The cases highlight how civil
society actors used strategies to put pressure on the government through dialogue, documentation, meetings, and
dharna.
5.
Conclusions
The section of the research
synthesizes findings from the case studies.Key takeaways include
1.
Civil society interventions play a crucial role
in amplifying the concerns of marginalized sections of the population and
addressing gaps in governance. In the case of pavement dwellers in Mumbai, CSOs
articulated the needs of this marginalized group to the government
2.
Interventions can take various forms, from mass
movements to more formally organized efforts Ex: Mass movements like the
protest against the Subarnarekha dam in Bihar, and more formal efforts like the
work of SPARC (Society for Promotion of Area Resource Centers) in Mumbai
3.
These interventions help the marginalized in
multiple ways, from offering critiques of the state to creating spaces for
engagement with the state. The Chhattisgarh Mukti Movement (CMM) for example
both critiqued the state and provided alternative support mechanisms for
people.
4.
The relationship between civil society and the
state can be both conflictual and collaborative, depending on the approach and
state response. SPARC experienced both repression and cooperation from the
state in their work with pavement dwellers in Mumbai.
5.
The state is not monolithic. Even within
repressive structures, there can be supportive individuals. The Vikas Mitra
Mandal (VMM) faced repression but also found supportive administrators within
the government structure.
6.
Societal inequalities provide context for
collective action but can also hinder it. In Chilika, for example, the
traditional antagonism between fishermen and non-fishermen limited the scope of
collective action.
7.
Marginalized groups often need intermediaries to
articulate their issues effectively. Example: In the case of Dalit assertion,
educated members within the community mobilized others, filed affidavits, and
represented them in court.
8.
The language used in collective action is
crucial for both state engagement and public mobilization. The Centre for
Science and Environment (CSE) campaign used highly technical language, which
was effective with the state but didn't resonate with common citizens.
9.
Sustainability: For long-term change, civil
society efforts need to be sustained beyond immediate goals. In Kadadara, for
example, after the initial campaign succeeded, the industry merely shifted its
site to another village, showing the need for sustained action.
10.
In a democracy like India, good governance
involves both reforming state institutions and creating a democratic culture in
society. It is mentioned how in Kerala, civil society's interaction with
governance is qualitatively different from that in Uttar Pradesh due to
different political contexts.
11.
As civil society engages with governance issues,
it must navigate its relationship with political society.
12.
Civil society interventions differ across
legislative, executive, and judiciary domains of the state.
13.
Effective civil society action often involves
coalitions of different types of organizations. The research mentions that most
cases involved a wide range of actors, including representational membership
associations, social movements, and intermediary organizations.
14.
Long-term engagement with governance issues
requires capacity building in civil society. Organizations like CIVIC, ABSSS,
KMSS, SPARC, and CMM continued their work beyond immediate goals, leading to
long-term engagement with governance issues.
15. Civil
society helps define, build consensus around, and evolve the concept of common
public good, which is central to governance.
Critical
Analysis:
Strengths:
1.
Comprehensive
Approach: The research attempts to cover a wide range of civil society
interventions across different governance areas, and a comprehensive historical
overview providing a broad perspective on the evolution of civil society in
India, covering key periods and timelines.
2.
Historical
Context for contemporary analysis: The inclusion of a historical overview
helps situate the current state of civil society and governance within India's
broader socio-political development.
3.
Focus on
Marginalized Groups: By emphasizing the perspective of underprivileged
sections, the research addresses an important aspect of governance often
overlooked in mainstream studies.
4.
Multiple
Data Sources: The combination of qualitative sources including a historical
analysis, case studies, and expert consultations allows for triangulation of
data, potentially increasing the reliability of findings through empirical
evidence.
5.
Categorization:
Attempt to map the diverse landscape of civil society organizations in
India.
6.
Recognition
of Global Influences: Impact of global events and trends on India's civil
society landscape is duly acknowledged.
7. Emphasis on Continuity and Change: The
overview highlights both continuing features and significant shifts in
relations of civil society with state, politics and factors of economic
production over time.
Weaknesses:
1.
Subjectivity
in Selection: The criteria for selecting "best thinkers" and the case studies appear subjective and
arbitrary. Isn't there a possibility that any counter views may not have been
considered 'best'?"
2.
Potential
Bias: The research methodology assumption that selected civil society
initiatives “have a positive impact on
governance issues” may introduce bias. Has this assumption been tested
against any data? Any cost-benefit analysis that proves the cost of these civil
society interventions was not greater than the larger public good? This bias in
methodology could be magnified by the creeping bias in case selection and
interpretation.
3.
Limited
Scope: By focusing primarily on initiatives “addressing issues of the poor and marginalized”, the research may
not capture the full spectrum of civil society-governance interactions in
India.
4.
Lack of
Quantitative Data: The methodology appears to rely heavily on qualitative
data, which may limit the generalizability of findings.
5.
Case
study Selection: The methodology of selecting cases based on perceived
positive impacts on governance, focusing on marginalized groups is laudatory.
However, the selection criteria seem quite subjective, which may introduce
survey bias. Clarification on whether assumptions were tested against actual
data would be helpful. Additionally, a cost-benefit analysis could demonstrate
whether the benefits of civil society interventions outweigh their costs would
have been helpful as there is quite a body of research to the contrary example
in Subarnekha Dam project.
6.
Outdated
Information(): Conducted in 1998-2000, the research may not reflect current
realities of civil society and governance in India which have potentially
changed.
7.
Western-centric
Framework: The over-reliance on World Bank concepts and Western
interpretations of civil society and “good governance” may not fully capture
the nuances of the (non-western) Indian context. There is very limited
consideration or accommodation of alternative models of governance or civil
society.
8.
Broad
Categorization: Operating in vastly different contexts and facing unique
challenges, CSOs have been grouped under similar categories. A more granular
approach to classification could offer deeper insights into the specific
dynamics and challenges faced by various types of CSOs (Jalali, 2013).
9.
Overemphasis
on Formal Structures: Informal and unregistered civil society groups play a
crucial role in social movements and community organizing but may not fit
neatly into the categories outlined in the paper. Informal community groups,
neighborhood associations, and grassroots collectives often operate without
formal recognition or structure but play pivotal roles in local governance and
community mobilization (Nair, 2013). A more inclusive analysis could account
for these informal actors and their contributions.
10.
Power
Dynamics: Leadership conflicts, resource limitations, and issues of
accountability within CSOs can undermine their effectiveness and credibility.
An exploration of these internal dynamics could provide a more comprehensive
understanding of the challenges faced by CSOs in governance (Chaudhuri, 2016).
11. Ideological Lense : The following
excerpt - “The Hindutva project is dangerous, precisely because it claims to
function within the prescribed parameters of political life…" juxtaposed
with the following excerpt - ”The Naxalite movement sprang up to address the
issues concerning the poor peasantry…”. The paper appears to adopt a particular
ideological lens that may limit its objectivity. The portrayal of Hindu
practices and symbols primarily in the context of social ills and oppression,
without acknowledging their broader cultural and historical significance,
suggests a potential bias. Dalit assertion in Uttar Pradesh is seen in a
positive light but other identity assertions in terms of language, caste or
religion is viewed with suspicion. This seems to confirm a certain ideological
viewpoint. Furthermore, the characterization of Hindutva politics as inherently
dangerous, despite operating within legal frameworks, merits deeper
examination. A more balanced approach might consider the complex interplay of
various social, religious, and political factors in India's civil society,
including both the challenges and positive contributions of different groups
and ideologies
Further Observations and Recommendations:
In furtherance to the critiques above, the
research could have been strengthened by:
1.
Incorporating more diverse perspectives,
including subaltern histories and regional variations. This may challenge
prevailing western and World Bank narratives about civil society and
governance, but would have added perspective.
2.
Pre-colonial forms of civic engagement and their
influence on later developments could enrich the analysis further.
3.
A more nuanced analysis of the contradictions
and conflicts within civil society movements can be provided to bring out
interactions within CSOs
4.
A more rigorous, transparent criteria for case
selection could be employed
5.
Including quantitative data to complement
qualitative insights and historical narratives
6.
This is a one-size fits all analysis. Comparing
with alternative frameworks for understanding civil society and governance that
may be more relevant to the Indian context could have been considered.
7.
A more critical examination of the impact of
global trends on India's unique civil society landscape could be offered.
8.
Further nuances could be considered. Example:
incorporating informal actors, considering the impact of digital
transformation, exploring internal CSO challenges, and examining the
relationship with market forces could have enhanced the study further.
Conclusion:
This research gives a valuable
historical perspective on civil society and governance in India. However, given
the important developments that have taken place in India since it’s
publication in 1998, its relevance to contemporary contexts is a matter of
further analysis. The study's strengths lie in its comprehensive historical
overview and detailed case analyses. However, its marked reliance on
Western-centric concepts, potentially biased case selection, and now-out of
date data raise questions about its current applicability. But, in summary,
this research remains a significant contribution to understanding the
historical development of civil society-governance interactions in India and
provides a foundation for further studies in this critical area.
References:
1. Banerjee,
S. (2020). Corporate social responsibility and civil society in India: Dynamics
of partnership and contestation. Journal of Business Ethics, 164(4), 613-627.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019-04325-2
2.
Chaudhuri, S. (2016). Leadership and
accountability in civil society organizations:
Examining internal dynamics.
Voluntas: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit
Organizations, 27(1), 104-125.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-015-9591-3
3.
Jalali, R. (2013). Financing empowerment?
Microfinance in a globalizing India. The ANNALS of the American Academy of
Political and Social Science, 689(1), 96-115.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716213482441
4. Jebaraj,
P. (2012, August 27). What is the Anna Hazare movement? The Hindu. Retrieved
from https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/what-is-the-anna-hazare-movement/article3819
465.ece
5.
Nair, T. S. (2013). Civil society in India: A
review of changes since the 1990s. Journal of South Asian Development, 8(3),
401-424. https://doi.org/10.1177/0973174113504845
6.
Smith, J. (2020). Evolving Paradigms of Civil
Society in Digital India. Journal of South Asian Studies, 45(3), 278-295.
7.
Tandon, R., & Mohanty, R. (2002). Civil
Society and Governance. New Delhi: Samskriti.
8.
Thakur, R. (2019). The role of civil society in
Swachh Bharat Abhiyan. Journal of Environmental Management and Policy, 3(2),
155-168.
https://doi.org/10.47541/jemp.v3i2.53
[1]
Excerpt
: "The last decade has been particularly important in pressing us
to rethink about the role of the state and its people in the matters related to
governance. The changes which swept through the communist regimes in the
Eastern Central Europe and military dictatorships in the countries of Latin
America ushering in capitalist economy and establishing democratic regimes not
only affected the political and economic landscape in these countries; along
with that they also proved the collective power of ordinary people in defining
and achieving what they considered as essential for good life.”
[2] To quote
the author, "Today, traditional associational basis of caste, ethnicity
and community are being replaced with contemporary affiliations based on
neighbourhood, profession, class and work place." This contention is
debatable and may not fully capture the persistence of traditional associations
in Indian society which have even necessitated legal and constitutional push to
'social justice' interventions and contemporary marxists activities in India.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.